A change in prespective.... Clear as Mud...."They should, we shoul

[danb]

Hello, A few week ago in Beijing I was watching CCTV news. They were talking about a story on the US. It was about a report that was fairly critical of the US.

 

Here is a link:

http://english.cntv....25/107580.shtml

 

 

Ten years ago I would have been upset at the story and I might have even talked back to the screen and asked: 'who did they think they were were. What gave them the right to critize the US?' After all what about T and T and their OCP and the CR and even their precious damned 3GD, etc,etc,and etc. Today my prespective and my reaction (of China interanl policies) has changed. I wonder why? Has your perspective of China changed over the years? Why did you think that is? DanB

 

BTW can anyonyone guess what my 5 abbreviations stand for?

[Randy W]

No, I can't.

 

The article is blatantly hypocritical - the Chinese are far too accustomed to the response they get within their own country and basically have no clue as to how to deal with international affairs.

 

This article is a BIG step backwards for CCTV in terms of laughability, as were the comments from Yang Rui.

[credzba]

While some of the accusations were out of date, and as such not really pertinent, many of the political, and economic issues were accurate.

The loss of right wrt. "national security" and "anti-terrorism" are definitely a sad mark on our country's rights record.

The police handling of many situations is not what we all would expect from our law enforcement officials.

The unbalanced imprisonment of specific cultural segments of the population is not justified.

The eradication of the native Indians culture, and life is sad.

The extremely high financial status of politicians compared to average citizen is cause for concern.

Heck, what about our own issues with immigration policy. Yesterday I was discussing becoming a citizen with a foreign co-worker, and he reported how unfair the citizenship process is as well. so, both immigration AND citizenship process is filled with issues.

 

Certainly not everything stated in the article is significant, but I agree with the intent.

If USA is going to publish an annual report on human rights for other countries, an introspection of our OWN human rights is reasonable.

In the future, our human rights report should discuss, and measure our OWN progress at resolving issues, as well as report on other countries. THAT would be a human rights report I could respect.

Edited June 5, 2012 by credzba (see edit history)

[foobaz123]

While I realize this is in no small part due to my own personal beliefs and biases, I can't take seriously a report on "human rights" which cites civilian gun ownership as a violation of human rights. While realizing that China has made great strides, as compared to times past, I can't help but think that only a totalitarian state would cite ownership of the tools of resistance and self-defense as a violation of human rights.

 

It is also hard to take seriously the complaints about OWS protestors getting arrested. Was it sometimes done with too heavy a hand? Probably. Were they all released? Yes. Were they arrested for the content of their message? No. Therein lies the critical difference.

 

As long as basic rights, very basic, are routinely denied and the exercise thereof routinely punished the entire report must be tossed out. Even if it does contain parts that may generally be correct, the source taints it.

[Randy W]

While I realize this is in no small part due to my own personal beliefs and biases, I can't take seriously a report on "human rights" which cites civilian gun ownership as a violation of human rights. While realizing that China has made great strides, as compared to times past, I can't help but think that only a totalitarian state would cite ownership of the tools of resistance and self-defense as a violation of human rights.

 

It is also hard to take seriously the complaints about OWS protestors getting arrested. Was it sometimes done with too heavy a hand? Probably. Were they all released? Yes. Were they arrested for the content of their message? No. Therein lies the critical difference.

 

As long as basic rights, very basic, are routinely denied and the exercise thereof routinely punished the entire report must be tossed out. Even if it does contain parts that may generally be correct, the source taints it.

 

The difference is that on CCTV, they don't have to worry about anyone bringing up Tiananmen Square.

[A Mafan]

You forgot "GLF" and "L1KFB".

 

I got 3 of your references: T, T, CR.

 

Not sure about OCD or 3GD...my wife jokes she has Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, but I don't think that's what you meant.

 

 

I don't think the US' treatment of its citizens and lawbreakers is unscrutinized by the world at all. Anyone can criticize, because no govt is perfect, no legal system is perfect.

 

The difference is in the US you always have the right to seek redress from the govt. And while the govt can and often does stonewall, Freedom of Information requests are powerful, the checks and balances in our system ensure that one branch of govt can compel cooperation from a stonewalling politician, and the two party system means that eventually someone from the other side is going to challenge or even replace you, and you can never guarantee your secrets can be kept forever.

 

China can't even come close to saying even half those things about their system.

 

Interestingly, my wife's attitude is changing. Not just about China and the US, but about politics.

 

She always used to ignore politics, thought politics was stupid. She couldn't understand why I paid attention. When I explained that my participation in politics will help create a groundswell so that we can keep more of the money we earn, she began to start watching the news more.

 

She got angry at the Chinese govt last night for complaining about the US Embassy releasing air particulate reports. She was upset because if China is embarrassed by those reports, they should clean the air, not "shoot the messenger" (that was a language teaching opportunity!). She was also amused and derisive that the news reports refused to actually name the US as being the nation doing it, as if the criticism was softened by not naming names when everyone knows who it is.

[Randy W]

3GD would be Three Gorgeous Dames (it was actually four - just kidding), CR would be Cultural Revolution, CP would be Communist Party.

 

If he wants to play games with the censors, simply use the words Tibet, Taiwan, Tiananmen Square, Falun Gong all in the same sentence.

 

Why would he want to play games with us? (Never mind - just feeling crabby)

[danb]

Hi, I should have had another T on my list. T for that country across the straits. On the other hand most here probably know the the 6 or 7 topics that we hear about whenever the subject of China is brought up. Pretty much always with a negative tone about them. 10 years ago I would have just listen and probably agreed. But now I don't. Why? for several reasons. One of which is because my Lao Po is from China. I try to see her perspective. Another reason is that when reading those articles I am now starting to try to see it from a different perspective. I wonder what I would think if my country was always being criticized by other countries. I really not all that interested in having other countries tell me how my country should be ran.

 

Even though I question about the quality of air in Beijing , I don't think the reason that the US Embassy in Beijing is to give daily weather/ air quality reports. Isn't there some more important matters that need to be tended to? I don't think that most internal matters neeed to be discuss/ preached by other countries. Do we have the right and need to interfer in the internal affairs of another government? Do our officials need to tell the Chinese govenment what is wrong with their present and past internal affairs and how they should correct and or change them? Didn't Hillary just call for the release of the prisoners of the Tianamen demostrations?

 

Of course this is a two way street. We don't need to be told how to handle our own internal affairs by foreign governments. None of us are perfect. In the past we were not perfect. Any idea what the opium wars between China and Britian was about? Have any of you ever read about some of the policies that we and other western countries force upon China in the later 1800's.?

 

Okay Okay...I will shut up. I take one history class and get all sort of crazy thoughts.

 

Danb

 

BTW: Tibet, Taiwan, Tiamamen, The One Child policy, Cultural Revolution and that Damned ( hint hint) 3 Gorge Dam.

 

PS, Randy, I hope you are feeling better today.

Edited June 6, 2012 by danb (see edit history)

[tsap seui]

I agree 100%, Dan.

 

We sound like someone's old naggin' muther-inlaw.

 

It is China's country NOT America's.

 

Everything we point our finger at about China we have done in our past, and often much worse than them.

 

We run our country face first into the dirt, yet we still point that crooked knarley finger of Uncle Sam at others. I'm sick and tired of the crap. Ya don't like China's way of doing things, don't go there, and don't buy anything made in China...LOL

 

tsap seui